“Imagine if the Supreme Court ruled against Obamacare only to have President Obama and Congress ignore the ruling!”
I tend to agree with most of your points, but in your above hypothetical, at least the people could replace members of congress and the Executive (via elections), whereas lifetime Supreme Court appointees making “final forevermore” decisions are left without a proper “check”. I’m not convinced the threat of impeachment would do the trick either.
Newt’s solution may not be the answer, but I believe something needs to be done to prevent the Judicial from continuing to take more power than was originally envisioned by the Framers.
I'm not really sure what Newt proposes. Some FReepers seem to think he's describing the existing separation of powers, and he wants the president and congress to start using their defined powers to better restrain the courts. If so, I think we can all pretty much agree with that.
Other FReepers think Newt believes 2 out of 3 branches can simply ignore the 3rd. If true, that sounds even worse than what we have. There are all sorts of legal and constitutional methods for 2 out of 3 branches to restrain an errant 3rd branch.
Are the courts out of control? Yes! Do we need to start impeaching judges? Most definitely! However, who really is to blame for this current mess? Judges rule like they do, because they have de facto immunity from ever being held responsible for their legal transgressions.
Ultimately, the blame is ours for reelecting representatives and senators who refuse to restrain the courts. Truth be told, statists absolutely ADORE the black robed tyrants, because the statists can achieve their aims by judicial fiat without regard to the will of the people.